Justice Janarthanam’smoments of glory

Wait 5 sec.

Justice M.S. Janarthanam had, at least, experienced a few moments of glory in the last 20-odd years.  After the Supreme Court, in July 2010, provided one year to Tamil Nadu to come out with justification along with quantifiable data for the continuance of the 69% reservation for Backward Classes (BC), Most Backward Classes (MBC) and Scheduled Castes (SCs)/Scheduled Tribes (STs), Justice Janarthanam, as the head of the State BC Commission, had authored a report in support of the quota scheme, as provided in the Tamil Nadu Act 45 of 1994.Exactly a year later, the then AIADMK regime, at a Cabinet meeting, adopted the findings of the report and decided that “there cannot at all be any doubt regards the fixity of reservation of 50 per cent to Backward Classes, 18 per cent to Scheduled Castes and one per cent to Scheduled Tribes.” On the matter of  “creamy layer” among the BC and MBCs, his take was that though the 1994 law had been in existence for well over 17 years, the Lakshman Rekha line had not been crossed, warranting the application of ‘creamy layer’ exclusion.”  This opinion was also accepted by the government. It continues to be in force. Nearly 20 years ago, when the demand was made for creating special reservation for Arunthathiyars within quota of reservation for SCs,  the government had turned to Justice Janarthanam to consider it. In November 2008, he, as the head of a committee, submitted a report to the then DMK government that the representation of the Arunthathiyars in Groups A, B and C services under the State “has been found grotesquely inadequate.” Consequently, a three percent quota came into force. for the Aruthathiyars. This has withstood the test of judicial scrutiny, says G. Santhanam, who served as Secretary of the BC, MBC and Minorities Welfare Department about 15 years ago.In 2012, he gave an opinion to the government for providing a 10.5% quota to Vanniyars within the 20%.. Though this was acted upon by the previous AIADMK regime nine years later, the Supreme Court, in April 2022, quashed the move. Published - June 07, 2025 12:40 am IST